Yes, why? Personally, for me, his workstation reviews have lost a lot of credibility after his last farce of a review."Sir, you need to step away from the workstations, please, until you have been deemed not a threat."Reply

This review was better than the last but I still take issue with two points:

1. Aesthetics. It's OK to comment on it but you make it sound as if others should consider your opinion on this issue when purchasing. As you said above, you thought the 8760w was better built and that's what we need to hear. Quality of materials and build. But try to keep in mind that other people don't have the same appreciation for HPs design as you.

2. "Standard" keyboards. Why do you consider HPs the more 'standard' layout? The layout on the Dell is the same as they've been using in the Latitudes and Precisions since 2001. Literally more than 10 years.

HP on the other hand has switched during the EliteBook's short life. Interestingly, the first and second generation used the SAME keyboard layout as Dell. So I'd argue (and have evidence to support) that the current HPs are using a NON-standard layout.

This is why we have issue with these reviews. You're making sweeping statements that aren't backed up by fact and you're using these to support your position.

As soon as you do this, you lose credibility. This review was better than the last, but you've still got room for growth.Reply

Have you addressed the lack of basic technical research regarding the Optimus system? This is critical in any informed discussion of these laptops.

Optimus with an 8 bit screen makes for great battery life, but you do not get that wonderful IPS screen. Note that HP does not bother even giving you this choice due to their design.

If you want IPS, FirePro, or HP you lose ~60% runtime. This would have taken almost no research to find out, and nowhere in any publications I have seen does it state that Optimus does not work with Quadro.

This site has always seemed to be about having accurate information, even if the reviews were a little behind. Your reviews, and your unwillingness to acknowledge the errors in a timely manner (as Anand has done many times) are not in keeping with this sites reputation.

This is a long time readers opinion. I do not typically comment because so many others do such a good job of covering what I may be interested in. Reply

What exactly are you asking for with regards to Optimus?From your statement, I suspect that you are already aware of the fact that Optimus is not supported on Quadro cards, just as it's not supported on desktop systems.What else is there, then, to say about the matter?

The article clearly states that the use of the 10-bit panel precludes the use of Optimus.

Lastly, since a Quadro card was not used in this laptop, I don't understand how the lack of Optimus support for Quadro is germane to this review.Reply

Optimus does work with Quadro cards - as demonstrated with Dells M4700 and W530 Thinkpads.

Personally, I think the hit on battery with using an IPS panel is too much. Most users will have an larger external monitor as their primary display to do real work, while the extended battery life will be much more useful on the road.Reply

For the same reason the Alienware M17x R4 is included: we don't have as many workstations up for review as I'd like, and I wanted a couple of baselines for what the consumer side is doing. Also, the 650M is a good demonstration of Optimus so you can see the kind of battery life you're losing by going with a system with a 10-bit display.Reply

Workstation-class GPUs are one of the biggest scams in the industry. All of the current "workstation" GPUs are exactly the same as a consumer GPU with slightly tweaked drivers. It's not even hard to modify the drivers if you feel like bothering (it's not worth it unless you're running autoCAD, maya, blender or 3DSMax).Reply

I'm pretty sure that quite a few software companies only give support for their products when you are running workstation graphics cards, otherwise they will just shrug and tell you to buy another graphics card.Reply

There is little difference between the drivers on consumer level GPU's under OS X and the workstation class video card drivers under Windows. That is the key difference between workstation and consumer level GPU's: drivers. Take a look at the cross platform software and the software vendors do certify the OS X drivers.

Beyond that the other differences between consumer and workstation GPU's are often related to GPU compute. nVidia only offers full speed GPU compute on their Telsa cards and have even started to nerf the Quadro line up (though not as much as Geforce cards based upon the same GPU die).

I've been able to spot two other minor differences between consumer and workstation cards. The first is hardware based line anti-aliasing and 10 bit color support. Under OS X, both this AA technique and 10 bit color output are provided on consumer cards.

The last difference would be the cards themselves. Workstation cards due tend to have additional outputs (either DL-DVI or DP) and more on board memory for the GPU. For a laptop this isn't as critical but worth noting for desktop systems.Reply

You can add the fact that Win under bootcamp runs relatively poor compared to a native machine. You lose a good 25%(at least) on battery life and no optimus-type switching. The drivers are also generic and have an impact on the system's overall IOPS(due to drivers). All in all not a good machine at all. It's good for the Apple user that needs sporadic native windows access on his machine and that's just about it.Reply

Just two points worthy of mention regarding the Dell..First, it was first offered with the IPS screen, as well, but most (if not all?) were plagued by blue tint issues so they are no longer offered (I'm surprised if the HP doesn't have the same problem as I'd presume the screens are pretty much the same?). So, if a better stock of displays is obtained, they might be offered again.Second, it seems to have a much better cooling system as it also offers the XM CPUs.Reply

Why not review workstations with 3D models and drawings that are made by some interior and graphics designers, even architects?I as a designer would see value if you had benchmarked programs like AutoCad, 3DS MAX and Corel draw with real life models, scenes and drawings.I don't see value in primitive benchmarking that is made upon models that ar made by some benchmark "manufacturer". That might be good for game designers at most.Also, screens of benchmarked 3D and other objects are a must.Reply

I disagree. By look the SPEC provided models and scenes look like random leftover highscool projects. Models are primitive texture vise and the same can be said about models themselves.The only good models are provided for Siemens, but that isn't the most used program by designers, or is it?A standart made by some company for 6 year old console game development doesn't mean it is sufficient.Reply

It matters a lot, none of these menchmarks represent use of 32 megapixel textures for instance?And i'll repeat my suggestion, Anandtech has to use real world 3D interior and architectural scenes, with high res. textures.Reply

And I'll also repeat again, it needs to be a benchmark where you can reproduce the exact same environment for all the platforms.And you still haven't provided any suggestion of which benchmark/software to use.

And you bashed SPEC in your first post for not having textures (textures are only part of the story), it's geared towards 3D, and it does a good job of providing valid numbers for comparison.Reply

The use of real life interiors and objects is my suggestion. Why is it so hard to fathom? :P

You are right in that sence. Those benchmarks may be good for industiral oil rig piping models, bet the problem is - no High res. textures are tested, they should.

If there is no such convinient test then Anand can try and make one if they see fit. Anandtech is a review site, not a hobby site that tries only standart tests.So they have the obligation to upp the ante if they will continue to write workstation previews but calling them reviews. Really sad considering the work that is put in some gaming gear.

P.S.

I'm a reader, and so are you - ask for more, this is not comunism ;)Reply

Making a benchmark like this is no simple task. SPEC is not perfect but it is a standard which is important because you can compare your own personal results to those of Anand's.

When I read a workstation review I am interested it's workstation 3D design and analysis/simulation capabilities, I could care less about textures.

To write a proper benchmark would require a very high competence with whatever software you are trying to benchmark. For example with Solidworks when you access the software via the API(which you would need for benchmarking) you get very different results than through the standard UI. You would need to account for that. Now in particular Solidworks has a built in benchmark which could be used. However a license of Solidworks is pretty expensive for a review site, and it would need to be kept up to date to be viable.

As for your comment about Siemens, Siemens owns the parasolid core, which is used by a huge number of 3D modelling programs. So its benchmark is very valid.Reply

If you don't care about textures - good for you, I care. ;)Review sites usually dwell on companies wanting them to review their gear, but why not arrange a sponsoreship from soft companies? I'm almost certain the reason is not that AnandTech couldn't arrange free softs but the inconsistant number of reviews of proffesional gear to justify such an agreement for the other side of the table.

Thanks for the info on Siemens, but the only somewhat popular program that uses its instructions is Solidworks, so... irrelivant for me.Reply

A note on your request for high definition textures...I am an architect and do quite a bit of 3d modelling and rendering in a Autodesk Revit and 3DSmax. I am fortunate enough to work for an office that lets me build and maintain my own workstations along with others for power users in the office.

I have no idea why you would really need high res textures FPS figures. Conventional programs limit the texture previews in the viewports and only make use of the full image at time of render.

The 3d benchmarks provided DO give a very good idea of how the performance would scale. Maybe benchmarks don't give you the exact FPS of each program but it will provide solid comparisons between the hardware.

If you are concerned about how the hardware can handle such high textures at time of render it would really bring up the question why would you being rendering such scenes on a laptop? It would seem more effective to get a mid-level laptop for mobile/modeling and make use of a dedicated render node(s).Reply

A continuous pattern for multiple wooden panels is an example where i would use a high res texture (2x6m). Wery convinient in such and other cases.Of course one can use continuous mirroring function, compress the textures into smaller ones, but that is not the remedy for me all the time.Why a laptop? I employ myself and i spend weekennds on the country side, and often i have to render a few additonal frames at that time. For stable electricity feed i'd rather have a laptop with its own battery, and not a second stationary machine with a huge ups.Reply

You forgot to point out one more item that is ***BETTER***. The M4700 can use the same docking station that every E-Family Latitude can (for the past 4 generations). That way if you have to, you can use someone else's dock when visiting another building, or site. Reply

Has Dell issued a new, less capable dock? My E series dock has 1 each DVI, DP, and VGA ports; using both the sandy bridge IGP and the Quadro I can drive all 3 external outputs and my Latitude's built in LCD at the same time.

I'd like to try running a 4th external display from one of the laptop's video out's instead; but haven't managed to finagle a 4th monitor at the office. Reply

Is the DP port support v1.2 of the spec? If so, you may be able to daisy-chain some displays or use a DP MST hub. Unfortunately, I've only seen one monitor capable of DP chaining to date and MST hubs are AWOL but continually promised 'soon'.Reply

I have seen a couple examples and a lot of stories that HP manufactured laptops are not as reliable as Lenovo or Toshiba. The HP's heating issue seems to be common among many laptops. I thinks this laptop is not worth the price at all!I think we have better options from other better brands for a better price.

By the way it'd be much interesting read if you could review the Toshiba Qosmio X875-Q7380 laptop. There aren't any reviews of it elsewhere. Reply

Honestly looks like the perfect combination of features for a balanced gaming rig at a VERY fair price from a company that, based on every time I've worked with their business offerings, has a flawless record of reliability. Reply

Actually, I find the one on my Latitude E6520 very useful. And I originally thought the offset to the keyboard would be odd and annoying.. except that my desktop keyboard has the same offset compared to my desktop monitor, so it's actually fairly natural for me.Reply

This is my favorite of all displays out right now even like more then amoled. Why is LG not putting dreamcolor displays on their phones? And selling dreamcolor phone displays to other smartphone manufacturers.Reply